Header Image (book)

Friday, December 16, 2016

Hacking Vs. Truth-Telling Leaks

[Note: I had another post queued up for today, but pulled it back in order to post on the matter below]

Apparently, WikiLeaks reveaeld some inconvenient truths about Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation.

According to the narrative of the past few days, however, those leaks, said to have originated with Vladimir Putin — with the intent of electing Donald Trump to the Oval Office, interfered with the United States 2016 National Election.

So now we find out that the CIA will not OFFICIALLY brief, and testify before the Congressional intelligence oversight committees over their intelligence on who, what and how, and if the election process was hacked in the USA.

Yesterday we have the Director of National Intelligence Clapper saying we have virtually no insight or evidence about the chain of events in which Wikileaks GOT the information they released, IN OPEN TESTIMONY....

33 comments:

Some interesting dynamics at play with this issue. I would like to know more about the contact between the Trump campaign team and the Russian government. to see if there is any nexus with the e-mail hacks.

Interesting that it's the CIA stepping forward to "investigate" this and Russian influence in the election of Donald Trump. The media have been exposed as nothing more than a garbage dump of information, more designed undermine the election of Trump and overturn an election in which these media have lost all credibility.

Interesting, too, that the head of the CIA, John Brennan is highly suspect since he's reputed to be a convert to Wahhabist Islam during a tour of duty in Saudi Arabia. It almost seems treasonous that he could even be appointed to that position.

Brennan is not a Muslim. The specious accusations of that come entirely from one nexus, a disgraced FBI agent who was caught having sex with an informant. Rand Paul filibustered over Brennan's support of unregulated drone strikes.

Swore his oath on the Constitution!?! Gads! If only every sworn official would do so.

There is no proof that he is a Muslim....but feel free to believe that he is. All of the "info" stems from one guy, discredited FBI agent John Guandolo, and is carried only on websites that pursue the same specious agendas.

John Guandolo is a former FBI agent who founded the consulation and training group, Understanding the Threat which is part of the inner core of the Islamophobia network.

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), an organization that tracks hate groups in America, describes John Guandolo as "a disreputable character, who regularly attacks the U.S. government, claims that the director of the Central Intelligence Agency is a secret Muslim agent for the Saudi government and says that American Muslims 'do not have a First Amendment right to do anything.'"

That's info that I've just found on your John Guandolo. It's posted on the web site of CAIR (The Council of Islamic Relations). Seems there exists a long list of Islamophobes there as well.

I guess we all pick our sources to believe, I think CAIR just may be on the biased side here, no?

What's up with Obama today. He's hi-jacked the airwaves of the country to deliver some sort of message that seems robotic and unfocused, rambling on and on in a stream of consciousness and his eyes look entirely unfocused.

AOW, I didn't watch the whole speech either. I was just surprised that he was on almost every channel that I tuned. And from the parts that I did see he looked "out of it" almost like he had aan ear piece and was just relaying what he was told.

This is all NONSENSE ginned up by D'RAT Operatives to try to UNDERMINE and DELEGITIMIZE Donald Trump's DECISIVE LANDSLIDE VICTORY in the ELECTORAL COLLEGE.

We do ourselves a disservice by bothering to pay attention to it. It's a FARCE that I, personally regard as an insult to my intelligence. I think all of you should too.

Since nearly everyone who works for the government in Dee Cee at every level is a DEMOCRAT, consequently not ONE of them has ANY credibility whatsoever when it comes to garbage like this.

It's just GRIST for the MILL of the ENEMEDIA anyway. FOX by the way has JOINED the ENEMEDIA in case no one has noticed. FOX BUSINESS Channel is still relatively sane. I wonder how long that will be permitted to last?

C-SPAN too in whom I've always had a lot of faith has JOINED the ENEMEDIA-D'RAT ALLIANCE also.

What proof do I have?

Oh PLEASE! All you have ti do is LISTEN to the kind of QUESTIONS the moderators ask, and the way they very deliberately STEER the conversation in an anti-Trump direction day after day after day. It's DISGUSTING.

All Americans should feel a great deal of relief because Russia is on their knees. Obama drew a line in the sand and now Putin is in hiding.

I for one believe Russia interfered with our elections. They hacked a kale salad bar and convinced the liberals in line to vote for DJT. They will believe anything but the truth. They had a worse candidate than DJT and they lost.

"...the CIA will not OFFICIALLY brief, and testify before the Congressional intelligence oversight committees."

Will not??? Congressional oversight is optional??? Voluntary?

Congress has been long remiss in strapping on a pair of big brass ones and going after the drones. Contempt of Congress is not, after all, solely at the discretion, and province, of the DOJ. They do have their own authority. How else are they a co-equal branch of government?

If Obama was interested in a dastardly nefarious organization influencing the election he'd investigate the democrats in Wayne County and Ingram County in Michigan. More ballots than voters.So much so that the Jill Stein recount couldn't occur because so many ballot boxes couldn't be re-certified.The canvassers should be in jail awaiting bail.Then summarily executed for voter fraud and election rigging.After a fair trial.

Of course, a man with pockets as deep as Trump's is egotistical. Not a surprise to me. I know a few individuals with deep pockets, and all have delusions of grandeur on some scale. Comes with the territory, I suppose.

Yeah...we'll have to disagree on that. With Trump's petulant, thin skinned, nothing is ever his fault nature and pathological lying...not to mention his odd sniffing during one of the debates [which he then predictably lied about.....Trump's delusions are epic.

We're stuck with TRUMP, which is infinitely better than Hillary, so I'm hoping against hope that at least we Conservatives GIVE IT UP and stop the criticism. He's got plenty coming from all corners. I do it, too, when he deserves it (which is often) but the kind of slamming insinuations that he's a coke user is NUTS. He doesn't even drink and everyone he's known for years says that.He did lie about the constant SNORT, however..during one of the debates. It made ME want to scream GET A KLEENEX!He has little dignity, he's thin skinned but he's our undignified, thin skinned president now and....he loves this country. Let's pray for better than the last 8 years. My biggest fear with the Russian and China things which have erupted lately is we knew with Obama we'd probably not go to war; we'd acquiesce, tuck our tails between our legs and hope for the best.To hear Kerry today saying how AWFUL the situation in Syria is today should rankle us all...where was HE??But today, with Trump threatening and pushing? Better to hide or better to threaten our enemies? Yikes!

Getting sick and tired of the whiners claiming that Bill's wife won the popular vote?Well...it's true....but only if you use the time honored Liberal method of claiming to be unable to connect the dots.......in other words, refuse to include reality

"But....but .....but....no proof!!!! No proof!!!"Of course there is no need for proof when they claim 'racism.'

The spoiled brats have one set of requirements for themselves, and a different one for the other side.

1. “If there is a recount in Michigan and Trump loses by a few votes, then it’s very plausible that noncitizen voting made a big difference. Hopefully, it doesn’t come to that.”

Richman was the co-author of a 2014 study that looked at noncitizen voting in the 2008 and 2010 elections. In the comparable presidential election year, the Old Dominion study determined 6.4 percent on noncitizens in the United States voted in the 2008 presidential election, and about 81 percent of those voters backed Democrat Barack Obama.

Richman applied those numbers to 2016:

The basic assumptions on which the extrapolation is based are that 6.4 percent of noncitizens voted, and that of the noncitizens who voted, 81.8 percent voted for Clinton and 17.5 percent voted for Trump. … 6.4 percent turnout among the roughly 20.3 million noncitizen adults in the U.S. would add only 834,318 votes to Clinton’s popular vote margin. This is little more than a third of the total margin. … Is it plausible that noncitizen votes added to Clinton’s margin? Yes. Is it plausible that noncitizen votes account for the entire nationwide popular vote margin held by Clinton? Not at all.

Besides the noncitizens voting they found “1.8 million deceased individuals are Listed as had voted

No one cares or focused on the noncitizens that voted,

Trump could be correct about the number of illegal votes, but there is no way

Three million votes that were cast by illegal aliens,

If true, this would mean that Donald Trump still won the contest despite widespread vote fraud and almost certainly won the popular

We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:1. Any use of profanity or abusive language2. Off topic comments and spam3. Use of personal invective

Subscribe To

,

IMPORTANT NOTICE:Patrons of this Blog are advised that they will be held responsible
for any unlawful, harassing, libelous, abusive, threatening, or
harmful material of any kind or nature posted by their respective ISP.
Patrons are cautioned not to transmit via comments, including links
to any material that encourages conduct that could constitute a
criminal offense, give rise to civil liability, or otherwise violate
any applicable local, state, national or international law or
regulation. Comments here are typically unmoderated and unedited.
The fact that particular comments remain on the site
in no way constitutes the site owner's endorsement of commenters' views.